Navigation



10000 search results for query court of appeals for the federal circuit


All

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit , 38 F.3d 1204 (1994)

United States Court of Appeals,Federal Circuit. Oct. 19, 1994. Alan F. The First Circuit transferred the appeal to this court under 28 U.S.C. of the [Court of Federal Claims] or a district court be invoked to enforce a Back Pay Claim."

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit , 990 F.2d 1237 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals,Federal Circuit. April 22, 1993.Rehearing Denied May 19, 1993. Marvin D. In reviewing procedural issues that are not unique to patent law, we apply the law of the regional circuit where appeals from the particular district Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which affirmed the lower court's decision. EDO, 911 F.2d 1447.

Larry J. Culley v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 222 F.3d 1331 (2000)

CULLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-5110 DECIDED: August The Court of Federal Claims granted the Government's motion for summary judgment, finding that Mr. Culley appeals the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims to this Court.

Bruce E. Abbot v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 204 F.3d 1099 (2000)

ABBOT, et al, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 98-5180 DECIDED: On March 15, 1996, the Court of Federal Claims consolidated Acosta and Adams with Abbott. 10 Before the Court of Federal Claims, Conclusion 21 For the reasons given above, the judgment of the Court of Federal claims is 22 AFFIRMED.

Insurance Company of the West v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 243 F.3d 1367 (2001)

Cir. 2001) INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,v.UNITED STATES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Initially, this court denied the government's petition for interlocutory appeal, finding that the Court of Federal Claims had not entered an order denying We remand this case to the Court of Federal Claims for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Dr. Raymond G. Tronzo v. Biomet, Inc., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 236 F.3d 1342 (2001)

., Defendant-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 00-1007 DECIDED: January 17, 2001 Appealed from: U.S. Tronzo") appeals the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Tronzo v. § 1295 (a)(1) (1994). 15 We review issues not unique to patent law according to the law of the regional circuit where appeals

Basilio Q. Casilang v. Office of Personnel Management, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 248 F.3d 1381 (2001)

CASILANG, Petitioner,v.OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Respondent.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 01-3098 DECIDED: May Before CLEVENGER, Circuit Judge, PLAGER, Senior Circuit Judge, and SCHALL, Circuit Judge. PER CURIAM. 1 Basilio Q. Casilang petitions for review of the final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board ("Board") that affirmed the reconsideration decision of the Office

Carol Judy Higashi v. United States, U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit , 225 F.3d 1343 (2000)

Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit No. 99-5152 September 06, 2000 Appealed from: United States Court of Federal ClaimsScott N. Therefore, the trial court granted summary judgment for the United States on July 7, 1999. Ms. Higashi appeals. the decision of the Court of Federal Claims.

Merle S. Sargent v. Department of Health and Human Services, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 229 F.3d 1088 (2000)

SARGENT, Petitioner,v.DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 00-3180 DECIDED : October 24, 2000 Appealed from: Merit Systems Protection Board United States Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitMerle S. District Court for the District of South Dakota. 3 In light of Mr.

Waymark Corporation and Caravello Family Lp v. Porta Systems Corporation, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 245 F.3d 1364 (2001)

Appeals for the Federal Circuit 00-1327 DECIDED: April 6, 2001 Appealed from: United States District Court for the Southern and Before RADER, Circuit Judge, PLAGER, Senior Circuit Judge, and DYK, Circuit Judge. RADER, Circuit Judge. 1 On a motion for summary judgment, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Promac, Inc. v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 203 F.3d 786 (2000)

., SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, AppelleeUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-1075 DECIDED: February 8, 2000 Appealed from: Department of Veterans Affairs Board of Contract Appeals Christopher M. When performance was almost complete, Promac filed a claim for reformation of its contract based upon alleged violations of the Federal Acquisition Regulations

Michael Hubbard v. Environmental Protection Agency, and Merit Systems Protection Board, Intervenor. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 205 F.3d 1315 (2000)

*United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-3029 DECIDED: MARCH 3, 2000 Appealed from: Merit Systems Protection Board 3 Hubbard sued the EPA in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking instatement and back pay. Supp. 654, 657 (D.D.C. 1990) (modifying original order). 4 The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed.

Gerald Boyer, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 210 F.3d 1351 (2000)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-7079 DECIDED: April 10, 2000 Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims Judge Kenneth B. GAJARSA, Circuit Judge. 1 Gerald Boyer appeals from the October 8, 1998 and January 27, 1999 decisions of the United States Court

Earl Clemmons. Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 206 F.3d 1401 (2000)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 99-7107 DECIDED: March 23, 2000 Earl Clemmons appeals the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, Docket No. 97-2138, denying his application for reasonable attorney fees Id. 3 Clemmons filed a timely appeal of the board decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.

Patrick F. D'amico, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 209 F.3d 1322 (2000)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs,Respondent-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-7110 DECIDED: April 7, 2000 Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals for Veterans ClaimsKenneth M. D'Amico appeals from the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ("Veterans Court") that affirmed the order of the Board of

Alfred L. Brown, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 203 F.3d 1378 (2000)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 98-7071 DECIDED: February 18, 2000 We vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and remand the case to that court for further proceedings. 2 * For that reason, we conclude that the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims erred in holding that Mr.

Pca Health Plans of Texas, Inc. v. Janice R. Lachance, Director, Office of Personnel Management, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 191 F.3d 1353 (1999)

LACHANCE, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-1052 DECIDED: September ("PCA") appeals the June 24, 1998 decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, PCA Health Plans of Texas, Inc. v. Conclusion 16 Accordingly, the decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals is affirmed. AFFIRMED

Williams v. Federal District Court , williams-v-federal-district-court (2011)

Court of §ppeaI~ for tbe jfeberaI Circuit DARRYL L. be transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for Second Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631. COURT OF APPEALS FOR Katy M. Bartelma, Esq.

Sea-Land Service, Inc., (Now Known as Sl Service Inc.), and American President Lines, Ltd., (Now Known as American Ship Management, Llc) v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 239 F.3d 1366 (2001)

., (now known as American Ship Management, LLC),Plaintiff-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal After Customs' denial of the protests and further requests for review, Sea- Land appealed to the Court of International Trade seeking to recover the Having rejected all of Sea-Land's arguments, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the government. 14 Sea-Land appeals

Union Oil Company of California v. Atlantic Richfield Company, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Exxon Corporation, Mobil Oil Corporation, Shell Oil Products Company and Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 208 F.3d 989 (2000)

., Defendants-Appellants.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-1066 DECIDED: March 29, 2000 [Copyrighted Material Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge Rader. Circuit Judge Lourie dissents in part. RADER, Circuit Judge. 1 The United States District Court for the Central District of California denied the appellants' motion for

Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., Hal Antillen, N v. Hal Shipping Ltd., Wind Surf Limited, Holland America Line, N v. and Hal Cruises Limited v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 200 F.3d 1361 (2000)

., and HAL CRUISES LIMITED, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 98-1536 FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. 1 The United States appeals the decision of the United States Court of International Trade that the Shoe, the Court stated that in International Business Machines it had "held that the Export Clause allows no room for any federal tax, however generally

In Re Jay Alan Rothstein , 9 F.3d 977 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. July 30, 1993. notice of appeal, stating "[t]here is no provision in either the rules of this court or the rules of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for The Clerk of the Court of Federal Claims is directed to transmit a copy of Rothstein's notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal

Tammy Mahaffey v. Secretary of Health and Human Services , 368 F.3d 1378 (2004)

of the court may obtain review of the judgment of the court in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upon petition filed within 60 appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. 23 That position was considered and rejected in Grimes v. This court stated: 24 The Vaccine Act does not make review in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit an alternative to review

Xitronix-Corporation-V-Kla-Tencor-Corporation , cafc xitronix-corporation-v-kla-tencor-corporation (2003)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ XITRONIX CORPORATION, The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall have ex- clusive jurisdiction of an appeal from a final deci- sion of a district The Supreme Court has summarized that for the purpose of “desirable uniformity [] Congress created the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit as an exclusive

Southwest Marine of San Francisco, Inc. v. The United States , 896 F.2d 532 (1990)

the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit within one hundred twenty days after the date of receipt of a copy of such decision.... in view of the larger congressional intent embodied in the formation in 1982 of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, to impart uniform national of title 28 gives the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit jurisdiction of an appeal from a final decision of an agency board of contract appeals

Jasper Boggs, Jr, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs , 188 F.3d 1335 (1999)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee. 99-7003 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit DECIDED: August 18, 1999Rehearing '7292(c) The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review and decide any challenge to the The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims agreed that "Madden's proofs were not credible." On appeal to the Federal Circuit Mr.

Dachman v. United States , dachman-v-united-states (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5023 SARAH R. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5023 SARAH R. Bachman appealed unsuccessfully to the district court in Maryland and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Lawrence R. Rosano v. Department of the Navy , 699 F.2d 1315 (1983)

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the U.S. Claims Court, added 28 U.S.C. final order or final decision of the Board shall be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit." Sec. 1295(a)(9), provides: "The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction-- * * * (9) of an appeal from

McCullough v. United States , mccullough-v-united-states (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5039 GEORGE CALVIN MCCULLOUGH United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5039 GEORGE CALVIN MCCULLOUGH George Calvin McCullough appeals from the final judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint. McCullouch v.

Garcia v. United States , garcia-v-united-states (2015)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ JOSE RAMIREZ GARCIA, Appellant Jose Ramirez Garcia appeals the April 28, 2015 decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint for lack of subject Having exhausted his right to seek further relief under § 2255 without the prior permission of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Kissi v. United States , kissi-v-united-states (2012)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit __________________________ DAVID KISSI, District Court for the District of Delaware, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

T.F.H. Publications, Inc. v. Epp, Inc., D/B/A Engineered Pet Products , 91 F.3d 166 (1996)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. April 23, 1996. the Federal Circuit to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and it being apparent that T.F.H. 23d day of April, 1996, 3 ORDERED that this Appeal is hereby transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Johnny Granado, Jr. v. Department of Justice , 721 F.2d 804 (1983)

States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit." , which involves the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the federal district courts, but not the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. It expressly replaced the "Court of Claims or a United States court of appeals" with a single court--the "Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit."

Thomas W. Parker, Richard Allen Fuselier, Robert Kaltenbach, Leo Itz, Kenneth Meier, Lucius Breeland, Ii, Mark D. Breeland, Lucius Breeland, Sr. And Dr. P.W. Kimmell v. The United States, State of Louisiana and State of Texas , 1 F.3d 1251 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. April 15, 1993. Sec. 1292(d)(4)(A) (a party may appeal to the Federal Circuit an interlocutory ruling granting or denying a motion to transfer to the Court of Federal appellants' appeals are from the district court's dismissal of their suits, we dismiss those appeals for lack of jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C.

Daniel A. Spacek v. United States , 9 F.3d 978 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Aug. 20, 1993. TRANSFERRED. ON MOTION LOURIE, Circuit Judge. Sec. 1631 to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Clerk is directed to transfer Spacek's appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Bryant A. Brown, A/K/A Brian v. United States , 11 F.3d 1073 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Nov. 9, 1993. Brown, appearing pro se, appeals from a May 25, 1993, judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims, Moody R. Pratt, Senior Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting by designation

Yu, Claimant-Appellant v. Jesse Brown, Secretary of Veterans Affairs , 101 F.3d 716 (1996)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Nov. 14, 1996. The court further construed the March 4 and March 21 submissions collectively as a motion for certification to the Federal Circuit pursuant to 38 U.S.C With respect to the notice of appeal, the court ordered the Clerk of the Court of Veterans Appeals to "file the appellant's construed NOA to the Federal

Overton v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , overton-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue (2011)

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit BILL MAX OVERTON, Appellant, V. ' COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Tax Court . . . ."). Because we lack jurisdiction we trans- fer this appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. 28 U.S.C. § 1631 ("Whenever a civil

Howard v. U.S. [Corrected Coversheet] , howard-v-us-corrected-coversheet (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5035 ANDRE JOEL HOWARD United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5035 ANDRE JOEL Court of Appeals of the Fifth Circuit in support of the DOJ.

The Aleut Tribe v. The United States , 702 F.2d 1015 (1983)

of this court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. to the new United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. rules of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Craig J. Moore, Claimant-Appellant v. Jesse Brown, Secretary of Veterans Affairs , 47 F.3d 1185 (1995)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Jan. 31, 1995. Vet.App. VACATED. In Jones, the Court of Veterans Appeals concluded that the Federal Courts Administration Act of 1992 (FCAA) did not authorize it to award costs and fees under EAJA if all that was "pending" at the Court of Veterans Appeals on the date of enactment of the FCAA was an application for attorney fees and costs

Alimenta (Usa), Inc., and Alimenta Processing Corp. v. John R. Block, Secretary of Agriculture Everett Rank, Executive Vice- President, Commodity Credit Corp., and Commodity Credit Corp., Defendants , 848 F.2d 1244 (1988)

This appeal was originally filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which transferred it to us. Hohri, ... this appeal is transferred to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit." 3 The Little Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 10 The case be transferred to the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

Trafny v. United States , trafny-v-united-states (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5050 JEROME VICTOR United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5050 JEROME VICTOR TRAFNY DECISION Appellant Jerome Victor Trafny appeals from the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, No. 06-905C, dismissing his complaint for lack

Ryskamp v. Commissioner of Internal Rev , ryskamp-v-commissioner-of-internal-rev (2014)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ JOHN RYSKAMP, of Appeals (other than the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Tax Because the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has already received and docketed this matter, dismissal of this appeal

John Rodgers Burnley v. United States , 6 F.3d 788 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Sept. 27, 1993. an order of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing as barred by the six-year statute of limitations his complaint for damages arising out Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, sitting by designation

Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, Laboratory Corporation of America, and National Genetics Institute v. Chiron Corporation , 384 F.3d 1326 (2004)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. DECIDED: September 30, 2004. LINN, Circuit Judge. 1 Chiron Corporation ("Chiron") appeals from a decision of the United States District Court for the District , for abuse of discretion, applying Federal Circuit law."

Lorraine D. Henry v. John K. Williamson and Schmidt, Johnson, Williams, Hovey, Timmons, Collins, Williamson, & Ziegler , 79 F.3d 1166 (1996)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. March 7, 1996. Henry's appeal should be retransferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. 2 The following has been gleaned The case is retransferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Mueller v. Merit Systems Protection Board , mueller-v-merit-systems-protection-board (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-3086 CARL G. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-3086 CARL G. The board’s jurisdiction is limited to appeals by federal employees or applicants for federal employment.

Billy F. Price, Robert H. Hoffmann, Heidemarie Kruger, Susan Hustadt, and Estate of Henriette Hoffmann Von Schirach, Dr. Klaus Von Schirach, Plaintiffs/cross-Appellants v. United States , 9 F.3d 978 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Sept. 10, 1993. DISMISSED. ON MOTION ARCHER, Circuit Judge. ORDER 1 The United States moves to suspend the proceedings in the Federal Circuit pending a decision by the United States Court of Appeals It acknowledges that, should the Fifth Circuit disagree, the Fifth Circuit may transfer the appeals to this court.

Thomas Testa v. United States , 52 F.3d 343 (1995)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. March 21, 1995. On the same day, the Court of Federal Claims dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Counsel for the United States, clearly, did not enter an appearance at the Court of Federal Claims.

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit , 38 F.3d 1204 (1994)

United States Court of Appeals,Federal Circuit. Oct. 19, 1994. Alan F. The First Circuit transferred the appeal to this court under 28 U.S.C. of the [Court of Federal Claims] or a district court be invoked to enforce a Back Pay Claim."

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit , 990 F.2d 1237 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals,Federal Circuit. April 22, 1993.Rehearing Denied May 19, 1993. Marvin D. In reviewing procedural issues that are not unique to patent law, we apply the law of the regional circuit where appeals from the particular district Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, which affirmed the lower court's decision. EDO, 911 F.2d 1447.

Larry J. Culley v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 222 F.3d 1331 (2000)

CULLEY, Plaintiff-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-5110 DECIDED: August The Court of Federal Claims granted the Government's motion for summary judgment, finding that Mr. Culley appeals the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims to this Court.

Bruce E. Abbot v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 204 F.3d 1099 (2000)

ABBOT, et al, Plaintiffs-Appellants,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 98-5180 DECIDED: On March 15, 1996, the Court of Federal Claims consolidated Acosta and Adams with Abbott. 10 Before the Court of Federal Claims, Conclusion 21 For the reasons given above, the judgment of the Court of Federal claims is 22 AFFIRMED.

Insurance Company of the West v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 243 F.3d 1367 (2001)

Cir. 2001) INSURANCE COMPANY OF THE WEST, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE,v.UNITED STATES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit Initially, this court denied the government's petition for interlocutory appeal, finding that the Court of Federal Claims had not entered an order denying We remand this case to the Court of Federal Claims for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

Dr. Raymond G. Tronzo v. Biomet, Inc., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 236 F.3d 1342 (2001)

., Defendant-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 00-1007 DECIDED: January 17, 2001 Appealed from: U.S. Tronzo") appeals the judgment of the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Tronzo v. § 1295 (a)(1) (1994). 15 We review issues not unique to patent law according to the law of the regional circuit where appeals

Basilio Q. Casilang v. Office of Personnel Management, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 248 F.3d 1381 (2001)

CASILANG, Petitioner,v.OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Respondent.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 01-3098 DECIDED: May Before CLEVENGER, Circuit Judge, PLAGER, Senior Circuit Judge, and SCHALL, Circuit Judge. PER CURIAM. 1 Basilio Q. Casilang petitions for review of the final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board ("Board") that affirmed the reconsideration decision of the Office

Carol Judy Higashi v. United States, U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit , 225 F.3d 1343 (2000)

Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit No. 99-5152 September 06, 2000 Appealed from: United States Court of Federal ClaimsScott N. Therefore, the trial court granted summary judgment for the United States on July 7, 1999. Ms. Higashi appeals. the decision of the Court of Federal Claims.

Merle S. Sargent v. Department of Health and Human Services, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 229 F.3d 1088 (2000)

SARGENT, Petitioner,v.DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, Respondent.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 00-3180 DECIDED : October 24, 2000 Appealed from: Merit Systems Protection Board United States Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitMerle S. District Court for the District of South Dakota. 3 In light of Mr.

Waymark Corporation and Caravello Family Lp v. Porta Systems Corporation, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 245 F.3d 1364 (2001)

Appeals for the Federal Circuit 00-1327 DECIDED: April 6, 2001 Appealed from: United States District Court for the Southern and Before RADER, Circuit Judge, PLAGER, Senior Circuit Judge, and DYK, Circuit Judge. RADER, Circuit Judge. 1 On a motion for summary judgment, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

Promac, Inc. v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 203 F.3d 786 (2000)

., SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, AppelleeUnited States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-1075 DECIDED: February 8, 2000 Appealed from: Department of Veterans Affairs Board of Contract Appeals Christopher M. When performance was almost complete, Promac filed a claim for reformation of its contract based upon alleged violations of the Federal Acquisition Regulations

Michael Hubbard v. Environmental Protection Agency, and Merit Systems Protection Board, Intervenor. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 205 F.3d 1315 (2000)

*United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-3029 DECIDED: MARCH 3, 2000 Appealed from: Merit Systems Protection Board 3 Hubbard sued the EPA in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, seeking instatement and back pay. Supp. 654, 657 (D.D.C. 1990) (modifying original order). 4 The Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed.

Gerald Boyer, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 210 F.3d 1351 (2000)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-7079 DECIDED: April 10, 2000 Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims Judge Kenneth B. GAJARSA, Circuit Judge. 1 Gerald Boyer appeals from the October 8, 1998 and January 27, 1999 decisions of the United States Court

Earl Clemmons. Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 206 F.3d 1401 (2000)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT 99-7107 DECIDED: March 23, 2000 Earl Clemmons appeals the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims, Docket No. 97-2138, denying his application for reasonable attorney fees Id. 3 Clemmons filed a timely appeal of the board decision to the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims.

Patrick F. D'amico, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 209 F.3d 1322 (2000)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs,Respondent-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-7110 DECIDED: April 7, 2000 Appealed from: United States Court of Appeals for Veterans ClaimsKenneth M. D'Amico appeals from the decision of the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims ("Veterans Court") that affirmed the order of the Board of

Alfred L. Brown, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 203 F.3d 1378 (2000)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 98-7071 DECIDED: February 18, 2000 We vacate the judgment of the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims and remand the case to that court for further proceedings. 2 * For that reason, we conclude that the Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims erred in holding that Mr.

Pca Health Plans of Texas, Inc. v. Janice R. Lachance, Director, Office of Personnel Management, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 191 F.3d 1353 (1999)

LACHANCE, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF PERSONNEL MANAGEMENT, Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-1052 DECIDED: September ("PCA") appeals the June 24, 1998 decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals, PCA Health Plans of Texas, Inc. v. Conclusion 16 Accordingly, the decision of the Armed Services Board of Contract Appeals is affirmed. AFFIRMED

Williams v. Federal District Court , williams-v-federal-district-court (2011)

Court of §ppeaI~ for tbe jfeberaI Circuit DARRYL L. be transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for Second Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631. COURT OF APPEALS FOR Katy M. Bartelma, Esq.

Sea-Land Service, Inc., (Now Known as Sl Service Inc.), and American President Lines, Ltd., (Now Known as American Ship Management, Llc) v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 239 F.3d 1366 (2001)

., (now known as American Ship Management, LLC),Plaintiff-Appellant,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal After Customs' denial of the protests and further requests for review, Sea- Land appealed to the Court of International Trade seeking to recover the Having rejected all of Sea-Land's arguments, the court granted summary judgment in favor of the government. 14 Sea-Land appeals

Union Oil Company of California v. Atlantic Richfield Company, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Exxon Corporation, Mobil Oil Corporation, Shell Oil Products Company and Texaco Refining and Marketing, Inc., United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 208 F.3d 989 (2000)

., Defendants-Appellants.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 99-1066 DECIDED: March 29, 2000 [Copyrighted Material Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge Rader. Circuit Judge Lourie dissents in part. RADER, Circuit Judge. 1 The United States District Court for the Central District of California denied the appellants' motion for

Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., Hal Antillen, N v. Hal Shipping Ltd., Wind Surf Limited, Holland America Line, N v. and Hal Cruises Limited v. United States, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit , 200 F.3d 1361 (2000)

., and HAL CRUISES LIMITED, Plaintiffs-Appellees,v.UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellant.United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 98-1536 FRIEDMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. 1 The United States appeals the decision of the United States Court of International Trade that the Shoe, the Court stated that in International Business Machines it had "held that the Export Clause allows no room for any federal tax, however generally

In Re Jay Alan Rothstein , 9 F.3d 977 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. July 30, 1993. notice of appeal, stating "[t]here is no provision in either the rules of this court or the rules of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit for The Clerk of the Court of Federal Claims is directed to transmit a copy of Rothstein's notice of appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal

Tammy Mahaffey v. Secretary of Health and Human Services , 368 F.3d 1378 (2004)

of the court may obtain review of the judgment of the court in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upon petition filed within 60 appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. 23 That position was considered and rejected in Grimes v. This court stated: 24 The Vaccine Act does not make review in the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit an alternative to review

Xitronix-Corporation-V-Kla-Tencor-Corporation , cafc xitronix-corporation-v-kla-tencor-corporation (2003)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ XITRONIX CORPORATION, The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall have ex- clusive jurisdiction of an appeal from a final deci- sion of a district The Supreme Court has summarized that for the purpose of “desirable uniformity [] Congress created the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit as an exclusive

Southwest Marine of San Francisco, Inc. v. The United States , 896 F.2d 532 (1990)

the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit within one hundred twenty days after the date of receipt of a copy of such decision.... in view of the larger congressional intent embodied in the formation in 1982 of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, to impart uniform national of title 28 gives the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit jurisdiction of an appeal from a final decision of an agency board of contract appeals

Jasper Boggs, Jr, Claimant-Appellant v. Togo D. West, Jr., Secretary of Veterans Affairs , 188 F.3d 1335 (1999)

., Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee. 99-7003 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit DECIDED: August 18, 1999Rehearing '7292(c) The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review and decide any challenge to the The Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims agreed that "Madden's proofs were not credible." On appeal to the Federal Circuit Mr.

Dachman v. United States , dachman-v-united-states (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5023 SARAH R. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5023 SARAH R. Bachman appealed unsuccessfully to the district court in Maryland and the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Lawrence R. Rosano v. Department of the Navy , 699 F.2d 1315 (1983)

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the U.S. Claims Court, added 28 U.S.C. final order or final decision of the Board shall be filed in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit." Sec. 1295(a)(9), provides: "The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit shall have exclusive jurisdiction-- * * * (9) of an appeal from

McCullough v. United States , mccullough-v-united-states (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5039 GEORGE CALVIN MCCULLOUGH United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5039 GEORGE CALVIN MCCULLOUGH George Calvin McCullough appeals from the final judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint. McCullouch v.

Garcia v. United States , garcia-v-united-states (2015)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ JOSE RAMIREZ GARCIA, Appellant Jose Ramirez Garcia appeals the April 28, 2015 decision of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing his complaint for lack of subject Having exhausted his right to seek further relief under § 2255 without the prior permission of the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Kissi v. United States , kissi-v-united-states (2012)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit __________________________ DAVID KISSI, District Court for the District of Delaware, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit.

T.F.H. Publications, Inc. v. Epp, Inc., D/B/A Engineered Pet Products , 91 F.3d 166 (1996)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. April 23, 1996. the Federal Circuit to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, and it being apparent that T.F.H. 23d day of April, 1996, 3 ORDERED that this Appeal is hereby transferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Johnny Granado, Jr. v. Department of Justice , 721 F.2d 804 (1983)

States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit." , which involves the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and the federal district courts, but not the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. It expressly replaced the "Court of Claims or a United States court of appeals" with a single court--the "Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit."

Thomas W. Parker, Richard Allen Fuselier, Robert Kaltenbach, Leo Itz, Kenneth Meier, Lucius Breeland, Ii, Mark D. Breeland, Lucius Breeland, Sr. And Dr. P.W. Kimmell v. The United States, State of Louisiana and State of Texas , 1 F.3d 1251 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. April 15, 1993. Sec. 1292(d)(4)(A) (a party may appeal to the Federal Circuit an interlocutory ruling granting or denying a motion to transfer to the Court of Federal appellants' appeals are from the district court's dismissal of their suits, we dismiss those appeals for lack of jurisdiction. 28 U.S.C.

Daniel A. Spacek v. United States , 9 F.3d 978 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Aug. 20, 1993. TRANSFERRED. ON MOTION LOURIE, Circuit Judge. Sec. 1631 to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. The Clerk is directed to transfer Spacek's appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.

Bryant A. Brown, A/K/A Brian v. United States , 11 F.3d 1073 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Nov. 9, 1993. Brown, appearing pro se, appeals from a May 25, 1993, judgment of the United States Court of Federal Claims, Moody R. Pratt, Senior Circuit Judge, United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, sitting by designation

Yu, Claimant-Appellant v. Jesse Brown, Secretary of Veterans Affairs , 101 F.3d 716 (1996)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Nov. 14, 1996. The court further construed the March 4 and March 21 submissions collectively as a motion for certification to the Federal Circuit pursuant to 38 U.S.C With respect to the notice of appeal, the court ordered the Clerk of the Court of Veterans Appeals to "file the appellant's construed NOA to the Federal

Overton v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue , overton-v-commissioner-of-internal-revenue (2011)

NOTE: This order is nonprecedential United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit BILL MAX OVERTON, Appellant, V. ' COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Tax Court . . . ."). Because we lack jurisdiction we trans- fer this appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit. 28 U.S.C. § 1631 ("Whenever a civil

Howard v. U.S. [Corrected Coversheet] , howard-v-us-corrected-coversheet (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5035 ANDRE JOEL HOWARD United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5035 ANDRE JOEL Court of Appeals of the Fifth Circuit in support of the DOJ.

The Aleut Tribe v. The United States , 702 F.2d 1015 (1983)

of this court, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. to the new United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. rules of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.

Craig J. Moore, Claimant-Appellant v. Jesse Brown, Secretary of Veterans Affairs , 47 F.3d 1185 (1995)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Jan. 31, 1995. Vet.App. VACATED. In Jones, the Court of Veterans Appeals concluded that the Federal Courts Administration Act of 1992 (FCAA) did not authorize it to award costs and fees under EAJA if all that was "pending" at the Court of Veterans Appeals on the date of enactment of the FCAA was an application for attorney fees and costs

Alimenta (Usa), Inc., and Alimenta Processing Corp. v. John R. Block, Secretary of Agriculture Everett Rank, Executive Vice- President, Commodity Credit Corp., and Commodity Credit Corp., Defendants , 848 F.2d 1244 (1988)

This appeal was originally filed with the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, which transferred it to us. Hohri, ... this appeal is transferred to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit." 3 The Little Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED THAT: 10 The case be transferred to the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit.

Trafny v. United States , trafny-v-united-states (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5050 JEROME VICTOR United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-5050 JEROME VICTOR TRAFNY DECISION Appellant Jerome Victor Trafny appeals from the judgment of the Court of Federal Claims, No. 06-905C, dismissing his complaint for lack

Ryskamp v. Commissioner of Internal Rev , ryskamp-v-commissioner-of-internal-rev (2014)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ JOHN RYSKAMP, of Appeals (other than the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit) shall have exclusive jurisdiction to review the decisions of the Tax Because the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has already received and docketed this matter, dismissal of this appeal

John Rodgers Burnley v. United States , 6 F.3d 788 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Sept. 27, 1993. an order of the United States Court of Federal Claims dismissing as barred by the six-year statute of limitations his complaint for damages arising out Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit, sitting by designation

Laboratory Corporation of America Holdings, Laboratory Corporation of America, and National Genetics Institute v. Chiron Corporation , 384 F.3d 1326 (2004)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. DECIDED: September 30, 2004. LINN, Circuit Judge. 1 Chiron Corporation ("Chiron") appeals from a decision of the United States District Court for the District , for abuse of discretion, applying Federal Circuit law."

Lorraine D. Henry v. John K. Williamson and Schmidt, Johnson, Williams, Hovey, Timmons, Collins, Williamson, & Ziegler , 79 F.3d 1166 (1996)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. March 7, 1996. Henry's appeal should be retransferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit. 2 The following has been gleaned The case is retransferred to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

Mueller v. Merit Systems Protection Board , mueller-v-merit-systems-protection-board (2007)

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-3086 CARL G. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2007-3086 CARL G. The board’s jurisdiction is limited to appeals by federal employees or applicants for federal employment.

Billy F. Price, Robert H. Hoffmann, Heidemarie Kruger, Susan Hustadt, and Estate of Henriette Hoffmann Von Schirach, Dr. Klaus Von Schirach, Plaintiffs/cross-Appellants v. United States , 9 F.3d 978 (1993)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. Sept. 10, 1993. DISMISSED. ON MOTION ARCHER, Circuit Judge. ORDER 1 The United States moves to suspend the proceedings in the Federal Circuit pending a decision by the United States Court of Appeals It acknowledges that, should the Fifth Circuit disagree, the Fifth Circuit may transfer the appeals to this court.

Thomas Testa v. United States , 52 F.3d 343 (1995)

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. March 21, 1995. On the same day, the Court of Federal Claims dismissed the complaint for lack of jurisdiction. Counsel for the United States, clearly, did not enter an appearance at the Court of Federal Claims.